Why the squeamishness about sex?

Steve Mascord

You are probably expecting this week's Discord to deal with hefty issues such as the salary cap, collective bargaining agreement and stadiums policy. And we will get there.

But I found the story this week about the wife of Gold Coast Titans chief executive David May, Kortney Olson, intriguing. You know the one - about how she used to star in "fetish porn", had a drug problem and has now been appointed a volunteer strength and conditioning coach to the Titans under-20s.

Reaction to this story has either been outrage - the suggestion that she and even May must be sacked - or mirth. In England, League Weekly ran the headline "Ex-porn Star Helps With 'Cor' Strength".

I am not going to criticise colleague Peter Badel for writing this story because it's extremely illuminating about the way we see ourselves culturally.

How many players over the years have we given second, third and fourth chances after getting on the wrong side of the law, which to the best of my knowledge Kortney Olson has not?

Let's check the rap sheets of every ex-player involved in coaching under-20s sides. I'm sure some would not make for pretty reading.

Advertisement

We want her husband to resign because of her past? I would have thought family members doing volunteer work for clubs was part of the fabric of rugby league ...

We are willing to accept torrents of money from gambling firms but "porn king" Con Ange (who I accept shouldn't be a sponsor) is not even allowed in dressing rooms.

Why are we so squeamish about sex? Every time Sam Burgess gets asked by a panel show host about how his "search for a girlfriend" is going, do you think they're referring to sitting on the park bench holding hands?

One of the most interesting comments by any reader during the Cronulla group sex furore a couple of years ago came from a woman who wrote at the bottom of an online news story that she engages in sex with groups of men regularly, that it is completely consensual and she enjoys it.

Sure, there is a power imbalance there that would disturb most of us - but it is not for us to tell her what she does in her leisure time. Why is rugby league forcing a certain set of values on people - and hounding out those who don't conform?

That is, gamble a lot, drink a lot, spend hours in front of the TV, but be in a monogamous, house-owning relationship with a kid or two.

I know there is a line to be drawn but we are drawing it in the wrong place, not far below "puritanical". We are willing to forgive our players for just about anything but we seem to have far less tolerance and open mindedness towards everyone else. It doesn't help us in our quest to get the same demographic spread as the AFL.

Jury still out

There seems to be a wide variety of opinions floating around right now about the performance of the ARL Commission and, specifically, its chairman John Grant.

Much of the criticism - which originates in clubland - comes from two areas. One, it's mild xenophobia: new CEO David Smith doesn't know who Cameron Smith is. Two, it's the fact that nothing has happened yet - in a variety of areas including sponsorship, radio rights, the collective bargaining agreement, the salary cap, competition naming rights, etc.

But unlike in mathematics, in this equation two equals one. Once the decision are made, if the answers are unfamiliar or left-field, then we revert to number one: xenophobia.

I reckon Telstra will end up with the digital and naming rights. I think the commission will eventually eat into around $30 million of its futures fund to give the players a raise. I think Triple M and 2GB will get the radio rights (thanks, scoop!).

When that happens, we'll get a clearer picture of how Grant and his commission are going. The players should get a set percentage of turnover and the salary cap should equal the club grants. If all sides can agree on this as an objective, we'll get progress.

I'm not saying the commissioners are innocent of the accusations levelled at them. I'm not saying they're guilty. Any sensible observer would accept the jury is still out and will be for a little while yet.

Let's go to the comments

As usual, thanks for all the comments. Bob and John discussed whether Australians would ever side with the taxman. It was pointed out to me that British residents perhaps don't have the same adversarial attitude to the taxman because most of them don't have to fill out tax returns.

Starkers made some good comments about the suburban grounds issue. I am hearing that a millionaire wants to build a covered, 20,000-seat stadium in Alexandria of all places. The government has now backed itself into a corner; it can't really help this dude, can it?

CreepieMonet, I want to point out that I didn't say anywhere in last week's column that it was a choice between footy grounds and schools. It's not that simple and I acknowledge that (um, as they say in the classics, reporters don't write the headlines).

stojo01, I can explain the apparent discrepancy simply. Globally, I am scared of rugby league being gobbled up by rugby union. In Australia, with all the money it generates, if it needs the poker machine dollar to survive then it is being grossly mismanaged!

Tom and KellyBellyFonte had an entertaining exchange which I could not possibly add anything worthwhile to!